Hi, Am Dienstag, den 08.02.2011, 16:48 +0000 schrieb zoe slattery: > Hi Felix > > I think one of the ties that you have is that your module poms are both > > parent poms and reactor poms. In my experience in a modular development > > environment this poses a lot of problems, which is why we (Sling but > > also our company internal projects) clearly separate between parent POM > > and reactor POM. > Yes - thanks for this, they are both the same and I will see what I can > do by pulling them apart. > > In your quiesce case, this would given the following structure: > > > > quiesce > > +--> pom.xml (reactor only) > > +--> parent > > +--> pom.xml<-+ > > +--> api | > > +--> pom.xml --+ > > +--> manager | > > +--> pom.xml --+ > > +--> manager-itest | > > +--> pom.xml --+ > > > > And in the parent POM we only use dependency management for a small > > select number of dependencies and have full dependencies in each pom. > Having looked at Sling, what you have doesn't seem to be quite like > this. No parent directory? Or am I misunderstanding something?
We have only one single parent pom in trunk/parent. Other than that we have a few reactor poms. In the parent pom we just a handful managed depdencies (servlet API, JCR API, SLF4J API, JUnit). Other than that each bundle has its own unique dependencies. Regards Felix > > Its maybe harder to setup but pays off later -- and we don't update > > dependencies on each release. > > > > > > Regards > > Felix > > > >> This is rather ugly, but it does work - see this pom.xml for quiecse > >> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/aries/branches/experimental-release-by-module/quiesce/pom.xml. > >> This means that we'd never increase a bundle version artificially and > >> when we came to release (say) quiesce we would not re-release the same > >> code with a different name. The release process still gives you all the > >> source for the whole quiesce module - which I suppose is OK. > >> > >>> > > > > >
